What the heck is an arena shooter anyway?

I'll now try to sift through the diarrhea Chain just splattered all over my screen.

CHAINMAILLEKID posted...

There's like say... Tactical skill, which is knowledge based/And then there is physical skill

Congrats, you just figured out that you have to think AND push buttons when you play a game! And here I thought I was smart!

Ability based skill, for the most part, transfers well between all weapons.

"High-level play" doesn't involve randomness or terrible players falsely elevated to that echelon. A CoD player's "skillz" don't f***ing translate to CS or games like it. Why? Because he is used to aim assist, reduced ADS sensitivity, killstreak perks, and guns that act more like lasers with no recoil. He doesn't "translate" over to an arena shooter because all the crutches he relies on are gone. He'd get his own sack fed to him because he isn't used to the raw, unassisted skill that he would face. Thinking a CoD player could just go over and do fine in competitive CS, Quake, or whatever else is like thinking a paraplegic could just "translate" over to normal mobility and walk around.

Learned and applied knowledge does not transfer between weapons very well, save for specific similarities. Say, moving between scoped in modes of SR, PR, and HVS are all reactivity easy, but each has their own particularities which must be learned, but the biggest piece of the pie is shared.

Must be learned? This is a loadout-based FPS, random. That means you don't HAVE to learn anything but your chosen scrub gun. Stop trying to pretend there's skill in modern shooters.

Now, this "Knowledge is skill" aspect, is probably one of my least favorite part of competative games. And really the main reason I dislike traditional fighters, and why I prefer brawl over melee.

What kind of dumbass blather is this? First you're saying that there's two distinct kinds of skill, then you say that all guns have to be learned for their idiosyncrasies when they really don't, and now apparently one type of skill is dominant. This, and the random exclusivity bulls*** you came up with in the last post, make trying to get a coherent post from you is like trying to keep a gassed up homeless guy who's been taking shots all night from pissing all over himself. The real reason that you enjoy kiddie scrub fighters more is that you would suck in any real one. Brawl's entire "metagame", to completely violate that word, is just camp>poke>do random s***. That's why you don't see any "high-level" Smash players placing well in real fighting game tournaments, whereas top level KOF and SF players (Xian and Tokido, as a couple examples) are at that level in both games. You don't get this "translation of skill" idea because the games you like don't involve skill.

It really bugs me when somebody can win, just because they are more familiar with say... The map. Its really the worst part of public matches online, and the hugest barrier for people trying to become involved in a game.

First you're saying that there is actual skill in scrub shooters, but they should pander to casuals and let them do well with no knowedge of the game? Skill comes from practice and learning, not being spoon-fed free wins. It REQUIRES those hours of practice and learning about the game, and it's something you'll never achieve.

The real reason that you enjoy kiddie scrub fighters more is that you would suck in any real one. Brawl's entire "metagame", to completely violate that word, is just camp>poke>do random s***. That's why you don't see any "high-level" Smash players placing well in real fighting game tournaments, whereas top level KOF and SF players (Xian and Tokido, as a couple examples) are at that level in both games.

I don't disagree with your overall points (though I often disagree with how you say them), but high-level Brawl isn't what you would think. It's really aggressive.http://youtu.be/zbUFoSYQZSU?t=7m51s

I think the reason you don't see Smash players play well in "Real" fighting game tournaments is that it's a different style. I imagine if PSASBR had a competitive scene, you would see some overlap there. But KOF and SF have much more similar game-play, so you see overlap.

To be honest, the eSport I spend the most time watching is StarCraft 2, and from that perspective all of the fighting games seem really... Well, they seem to have a really low barrier for entry.---*Insert 25 wit here*

The reason that difference of "style" is there is that real fighting games are a lot more complex in nature. The execution barrier is much higher (at least to maximize damage, which is important at higher levels), the mechanics are a lot deeper, and the players are smarter. In Smash, you don't have much besides directional influence and some braindead "advanced" techniques, which usually have some massive advantage (like, 10 frames massive) that makes them ridiculously easy to perform, or absolutely no difficulty at all.

You could correct me by saying that there are characters in both games I mentioned, like Terry in KOF and Balrog in SF, that don't have that extreme exection outside of the highest level of play, which is true. But other mechanics, like option selecting, negative edge, the dreaded, now defunct vortex in SF all evolve high level play significantly as well.

As for your last point, it's true that the learning barrier isn't as ridiculous as some other games. However, compared to trash like Marvel, Blazblue, and Smash, it's large. I mentioned this a lot, but it's brutally difficult to play at an international level. Within a few months to a year, you could become an average player, but the execution, game knowledge, and psychic reads at the highest level are just unreal. Those players (Kuroda, a SF3:3S player is one of the best examples, IMO) have the game down to the frames, and know how to optimize everything and make their opponent work for every bit of damage, while peering into your soul with every move. They can get a max punish off some of the safest things on reaction, and know every possible option available to them and their opponent at every instance. Top-level fighting game players are beyond anything else the video game world has to offer, and Smash players are vegetables in comparison.

The real reason that you enjoy kiddie scrub fighters more is that you would suck in any real one. Brawl's entire "metagame", to completely violate that word, is just camp>poke>do random s***. That's why you don't see any "high-level" Smash players placing well in real fighting game tournaments, whereas top level KOF and SF players (Xian and Tokido, as a couple examples) are at that level in both games.

I don't disagree with your overall points (though I often disagree with how you say them), but high-level Brawl isn't what you would think. It's really aggressive.http://youtu.be/zbUFoSYQZSU?t=7m51s

I think the reason you don't see Smash players play well in "Real" fighting game tournaments is that it's a different style. I imagine if PSASBR had a competitive scene, you would see some overlap there. But KOF and SF have much more similar game-play, so you see overlap.

To be honest, the eSport I spend the most time watching is StarCraft 2, and from that perspective all of the fighting games seem really... Well, they seem to have a really low barrier for entry.

Not to mention...

I never compared brawl to traditional fighters, I only compared brawl w/ melee.---NS_CHAIN 2666-2862-7656

To some degree, you're right. Characters like Viper in SF4 have high execution but get away with a lot more than they should.

As for your post, it was far from A's and B's. It pretty much read like A, B, D, C, A, Z, A... and on and on. You're really bad at tying concepts together.

Yes, the execution is there, but the mental game is even bigger, especially in SF. There is no one in Smash that could remotely compete with Daigo (not so much these days) or Kuroda tier reading. Once again, that is inseperable with extensive knowledge. It's not just being garbage and getting away with random stuff like it is in the aforementioned trash fighters.